People I'm following

Last 5 visitors

Martin Tod

I realise there's a longer list for Winchester than Chandler's Ford - although some of the campaigns - such as the campaign for more ambulances - benefit Chandler's Ford as well. I'm just as committed to making sure people in Chandler's Ford have a strong representative as well the people in Winchester. I intend to hold at least one surgery a month in Chandler's Ford and to turn up to as many events as I can.

I strongly oppose the current plans. In terms of the specifics, there are all kinds of traffic problems associated with the plan, and the response of the Highways Agency to the proposal suggests these may be insurmountable. On a wider scale, I oppose the top-down planning targets that are driving the current decision to build on Barton Farm - and our manifesto would see them scrapped. I also don't support building on green fields while there is underused brownfield - and especially - car-parking space - in the city itself.

Several people have written to me about Conscience Manifesto and much of what is written in the wider manifesto I have no problem with or find admirable. For example, I share the concern about assisted suicide and euthanasia. However, candidates are not being asked to sign up to the wider manifesto - we're asked to sign up to a shorter and broader statement that I have more of a problem with.

I do of course, I support the right of Christians to hold and express Christian beliefs - and - within legal limits - to act according to Christian conscience.

The question that comes (as it always does) is where those rights conflict with the rights of others - or with the law - and how those conflicting rights are reconciled. At this point, I don't support elevating religious rights above all other rights.

Specifically, allowing people to 'act according to Christian conscience' without recognising that this may sometimes conflict with other rights is too much of a blank cheque. Am I allowed to add 'within the law' to that? Or are there laws (or human rights) that it is intended to exclude? Does this include racial discrimination? Or gender discrimination? Or discrimination based on sexuality? Or restrictions on the use of violence for example?

For example, there were those within the Christian Church who supported slavery - although of course, it was also Christians who led the campaign for the abolition of the slave trade. Would I have been required to protect the slave-owners right to act according to their conscience?

There are those (not Christian). who believe - for religious reasons - in the death sentence for blasphemy - and we've seen examples of where that belief has posed a severe threat to another competing right (free expression) within the UK.

In short, I certainly do not want to exclude religion from public life. Freedom to practice religion is an essential human right. But I believe religious rights should not be elevated above all our other rights. We need to continue to balance those rights and this makes it hard for me to sign up without adding some extra conditions or clarification to the manifesto.

I'm pretty certain the costs of the Sinn Fein MPs will be more than covered by the taxpayers of the constituencies they represent. If they choose to elect MPs who don't sit in Parliament, that is a matter for them. I would not want to refuse the people of those constituencies the right to vote for the candidates they wish.

Hi Naomi. Thank you for your support. I'm only running to be a Member of Parliament though. (It's like being the House of Representatives). We don't have a President in England. We have a Queen instead!

The Electoral Commission has ruled on the Michael Brown case as follows:

Having considered all the evidence in this case, we have concluded that 5th Avenue Partners Limited met the requirements to be a permissible donor. The Electoral Commission will be taking no further action in this case.